Here's a rule-of-thumb that I go by: Whoever takes the other side into account best is the winner. For example: Side 1: Language x sucks because of y! Side 2:

Here's a rule-of-thumb that I go by: Whoever takes the other side into account best is the winner. For example: Side 1: Language x sucks because of y! Side 2: While it's true that x potentially sucks because of y, y is easily mitigated by z, and y still offers benefits a, b, & c that most other languages don't. Even if you have only a shallow understanding of the argument, it's easy to see that in most real-world arguments Side 2 should win. It's related to who gets angriest because people usually get angry because they have run out of other options.